![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have just recently had my Airworthiness inspection on a DG-300 completed by the local DAR. He provided me with 5 pages of limitations. I noticed that the past owner had only 1 page, a total of 9 limitations. The airplane has only been in the country for 7 years. Does someone know where these limitations come from? What is the Guideline that the FAA DAR follows when issueing?
The plane has a exhibition/racing Special Airworthiness. John |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
FAA Order 8310F, including Chg 1 (347pages)
http://tinyurl.com/8fxtg (pdf) See Section 10, pg 184 for Experimental Racing, Exhibition. All items that pertain to Group I, Performance Competition Aircraft as applicable. Frank Whiteley |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Try re-applying for the Operating Limitations at your FSDO. My old
OLs had 16 paragraphs, one being the requirement to send an annual Program Letter to a specific FSDO which no longer existed. It was also 2300 miles away. I applied for a new EXP certificate and Operating Limitations at the local FSDO, which came to 9 sensible paragraphs. The only Program Letter required was submitted with the application. I thought that was exceptional service, and cost nothing. Yes, you did read - exceptional service - from the FAA! When an Experimental aircraft moves from one FSDO's jurisdiction to another, the new local FSDO would prefer to have the paperwork filed in their office. Jim |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks Jim
The other item that we started to discuss locally is can a owner of a experimental perform "ALL" maintenance on their ship? Part 43.1 (b) says "This part does not apply to any aircraft for which the FAA has issued an experimental certificate, unless the FAA has previously issued a different kind of airworthiness certificate for that aircraft. " The local DAR had said that I can do all maintenance. I just log it to the plane log book and put my pilot certificate number down. Now I know my own limits of what I can do and can't do mechanically. But does this mean that the only sign off I need from a AP or AI is for the condition inspection every year? This would lead me to believe that the only advantage to a homebuilt is a Repairmans liscense allows you to do your own annual. Is this thinking correct? Quote:
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Earlier, Gadget Guy wrote:
...But does this mean that the only sign off I need from a AP or AI is for the condition inspection every year? This would lead me to believe that the only advantage to a homebuilt is a Repairmans liscense allows you to do your own annual. Is this thinking correct? I believe that it is correct, unless there are specific directives otherwise in your Operating Limitations. It's definitely how I approach my experimental glider. But, personally, I'm of a mind that the annual condition inspection is best done by a party other than the builder or owner. They're more liely to bring a fresh perspective to the job. Bob K. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bob Kuykendall wrote:
Earlier, Gadget Guy wrote: ...But does this mean that the only sign off I need from a AP or AI is for the condition inspection every year? This would lead me to believe that the only advantage to a homebuilt is a Repairmans liscense allows you to do your own annual. Is this thinking correct? I believe that it is correct, unless there are specific directives otherwise in your Operating Limitations. It's definitely how I approach my experimental glider. But, personally, I'm of a mind that the annual condition inspection is best done by a party other than the builder or owner. They're more liely to bring a fresh perspective to the job. This is certainly my experience over the last 20 years. -- Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA www.motorglider.org - Download "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
There are differences regarding the assignment and transferability of
operating limitations depending on whether your glider was pre- (July 9, 1993) or post- (August 18, 1993) moratorium import. Frank Whiteley |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Gadget Guy wrote: The other item that we started to discuss locally is can a owner of a experimental perform "ALL" maintenance on their ship? We tend to be a bit liberal with the EXP rules. I hear you can disassemble and reassemble the whole flying machine, but modification is a bit of a gray area. There is a rating (?) you can get from your FSDO which would permit you to perform maintenance on your own experimental aircraft. This can be used to log hours toward other mechanic ratings. Agreed, Bob, a fresh perspective is good on the annual "condition inspection". Jim |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Liberal or not, alteration or major modification with likely void your
current airworthy and involve a new Special Airworthiness Certificate which would require new operating limitations and program letter and perhaps fly-off requirements. I'm aware of a experimental glider that the two previous owners were not flying legally. Neither came to the attention of the FAA, but there exists a trail of documentation that would indicate that pilots and perhaps those signing off the condition inspections were ignorant of specific requirements. Frank Whiteley |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Earlier, JS wrote:
We tend to be a bit liberal with the EXP rules. I hear you can disassemble and reassemble the whole flying machine, but modification is a bit of a gray area. There is a rating (?) you can get from your FSDO which would permit you to perform maintenance on your own experimental aircraft. This can be used to log hours toward other mechanic ratings... So far as I know, there is no such rating. The closest thing I know of is the reparman's certificate available to the builder of an amateur-built experimental. As as others have mentioned, the only unique priviledge it confers is that of conducting the annual condition inspection. Modifications depend on the aircraft's specific operating limitations. Several years ago I developed a retrofit center stick control system for my HP-18. At the time, my OLs specified that I had to inform the FAA in writing of any major modifications. I did, and the FAA guys came out and inspected it. They issued a new airworthiness certificate, and also new operating limitations that said removed the provision for informing the FAA, and instead just imposing a new test period. Thanks, and best regards to all Bob K. http://www.hpaircraft.com/hp-24 |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Flying Club with Experimental Aircraft | Jeff | Home Built | 6 | October 5th 05 09:16 PM |
Experimental planes at air shows? | Eugene Maslov | Home Built | 4 | May 31st 05 05:09 PM |
Experimental or not? | John D. Abrahms | Home Built | 23 | April 14th 05 01:45 AM |
Weird Experimental Certificate wording - Normal? | Noel Luneau | Soaring | 12 | January 11th 05 06:11 PM |
Book Review: Converting Auto Engines for Experimental Aircraft , Finch | Paul | Home Built | 0 | October 18th 04 10:14 PM |